Bruce Abrams wrote in message news:Mx_ac.156391$Cb.1611810@attbi_s51...


It should come as no surprise to anyone that top-tier products like
cables have little 'sound' of their own, and that it's the cheaper
stuff that does.

Actually, it should come as a great surprise to those who are willing to
spend mega-bucks on cables every so often, and even more of a surprise to
the reviewers who wax poetic over the incredible difference one megabuck
cable makes over another.

I have described, before, my test of listening to $50 Monster
interconnect and $100 Monster interconnect. I can tell them apart.


Ergo, the better the quality, the more closely
perfection is approached, and the subtler the differences. Comparisons
between two brands of high-end cables are less likely to show
differences than comparisons between cheap cables and high-end cables.

Perhaps you could explain the reasoning in the above statement. What is it
that a "high-end cable" does better than the "cheaper stuff" that would make
it sound different?

You can read the product literature just as easily as I can. They
explain in the literature what features the cable has.

I bought this one:

http://www.monstercable.com/productPage.asp?pin=129

1 m. pair - 3.28 ft. ILR2-1M 102310 $99.95 pr.

I compared it to an older Monster cable that was about half that
price.

You suggest a measure of quality. Can we define
"quality" in this context? If two pieces of wire measurable pass a signal
equally well and are sonically indistinguishable under controlled
conditions, what other qualitative measure would you apply? Does it make a
difference if one is 12 guage Home Depot speaker wire and one is Kimber
Black Pearl? You stated that, "...the better the quality, the more closely
perfection is approached, and the subtler the differences." What if the
quality of the "cheaper stuff" was already adequate to be functionally
perfect for the application?

It isn't. I could tell the two interconnect cables apart, easily.
Better imaging, transient repsonse, etc.


Here's an example of what I mean: 802.11B runs at 11 megabit, while 802.11G
runs at 22 megabit, so G must be better/faster, right? Well if the only
thing I use my wireless network for is internet access and my internet
bandwidth is 5 megabit, is G better? Only in technical sense, as I will
perceive no benefit.